tell your doctor about your medicines and if you're pregnant or planning to be. otezla. show more of you. we've hadfor a long time.is in san francisco and half-measures haven't fixed it. homelessness doesn't just hurt homeless people. it hurts all of us. that's why we're all voting "yes" on c. the plan is paid for by corporations that just got a massive tax break. it's time for them to give back by helping all of us to fix our homeless crisis. with more affordable housing... expanded mental-health services... clean restrooms and safe shelters. vote "yes" on c. it helps all of us.

good evening. late today, the president of the united states spoke to reporters. he made a string of false and unsupported claims, the kind that stoke fear in many

americans just 14 days before elections. he trotted out vice president pence to back up some of those claims which the vice president, as you'll see, wasn't really able to do. then after doubling and tripling down on his still unsupported claims, he said this -- >> there's no proof of anything. there's no proof of anything. >> he was talking there about his claims that the caravan of central american migrants walking north through mexico is infiltrated by middle easterners suggesting even at times isis terrorists. finally admitting however there's no proof of anything. ask yourself, did the president in those few words also reveal something beyond that specific question? about how he views proof and facts and everything else central to public debate in a functioning democracy. we'll ask that question tonight because we're at a time wherever you stand on the partisan spectrum where these things matter most. keeping them honest, at just this critical moment president trump appears to be amplifying his disregard for the facts. so again tonight, let's start with some facts. this is from the state

department's july 2017 country reports on terrorism. and i'm quoting now. there are no known international terrorist organizations operating in mexico. no evidence that any terrorist group has targeted u.s. citizens in mexican territory, and no credible information that any member of a terrorist group has traveled through mexico to gain access to the united states. now, you might be saying okay, that's a report from july of last year about conditions back in 2016. what about now? maybe it's changed. well, here's what a senior administration counterterrorism official told cnn yesterday about current conditions, and i'm quoting, while we acknowledge there are vulnerabilities at both our northern and southern border, we do not see any evidence that isis or any sunni terrorist groups are trying to infiltrate the southern border. those are the facts not just as we know them but as knowledgeable people in the president's own administration do. this isn't about the merits of this or that immigration policy, only about making arguments based on facts, not fears.

which is also why again tonight we're not showing wall-to-wall video of that caravan itself, because whatever you think about the people in it, there's no evidence they are as the administration is suggesting some kind of invading army infiltrated potentially by terrorists looming on the u.s. border. they're 1,100 miles away from the nearest border crossing. they come mainly from honduras where they're fleeing a variety of problems including, according to multiple reporters who have interviewed them, gang violence, repressive government and poverty. and there are very real disagreements about how to deal with them, legitimate disagreements, but again, that's not the argument the president is making or the one at least parts of his administration have been scrambling to defend with very little success, just a whole lot of misleading language. just to recap, here's what the president tweeted yesterday. quote, "sadly, it looks like mexico's police are unable to stop the caravan heading to the southern border of the united states. criminals and unknown middle easterners are mixed in. he's also at other times said isis members could be in the caravan. also that it's being funded by democrats.

he's offered no evidence for any of it. that's where things stood as he spoke with reporters this afternoon in the oval office and cnn's jim acosta pressed him for proof. >> you had said there were middle easterners in the caravan. can you explain that? are you saying there are terrorists? >> there could very well be. if you look at -- >> do you know for sure? >> i have very good information. i have very good information. and if you look at what's happened with honduras and statements made about honduras and even a phone call that our vice president had today, which i think he can maybe reveal -- you want to mention that, mike? is that okay? >> so this was sort of a suspenseful moment because it felt like the vice president was about to make some grand reveal because he said he had very good evidence -- very good information, some new evidence about middle eastern terrorists, something he'd just gotten from that call. but that didn't happen. >> at the president's direction, i spoke to president hernandez of honduras.

he told me the caravan is now making its way through mexico, headed for the southern border, was organized by leftist organizations and financed by venezuela. and we -- as we have said -- >> and the democrats maybe? and the democrats. >> so that's the vice president of the united states there not saying a single word about middle eastern terrorists in the caravan, which apparently left the president wanting more, as the follow-up question came. >> where is the proof that democrats are paying for this caravan? why would they pay for a caravan? >> you know what? you're going to find out and we're going to see. well, maybe they made a bad mistake too. we're going to find out about that. what else did they say, mike, about isis? did they say something? >> just that it's been organized by leftist groups. >> all right, so on the democrats, we'll find out. we're going to see. that's something the president tends to say a lot when he doesn't actually have an answer, and then he asks the vice president, what about isis. and the answer from the vice

president, who's never been shy about backing up the boss, says it's leftist groups. then the president said this. >> let me just tell you something. i spoke with border patrol this morning. and i spoke to them last evening. and i spoke to them the day before. speak to them all the time. and they say -- and you know this as well as anybody -- over the course of the year, over the course of a number of years, they've intercepted many people from the middle east. they have intercepted isis. they have intercepted all sorts of people. >> all right. so keeping them honest again, nothing in what the president said there actually supports his own repeated claims that there unknown middle easterners, perhaps isis terrorists in that caravan heading for this country. he only says he's been told over the years authorities have stopped people somewhere from the middle east and isis from entering the country. and today, perhaps under pressure from all the

president's claims, the vice president, the department of homeland security, and others have been offering variations on the same very nonspecific language. listen. >> i mean, in the last fiscal year, we apprehended more than -- more than -- more than ten terrorists or suspected terrorists per day at our southern border. from countries that are referred to in the lexicon as other than mexico. that means from the middle east region. >> okay. his spokesperson later had to amend that, saying that figure was actually not about the southern border. what he said there about the southern border, it wasn't about the southern border but for all ports of entry. but she also repeated the vice president's claim without offering evidence that it's inconceivable the caravan has not been infiltrated by individuals with ties to extremism. and if you're at a loss over what to make of that and are

ready to punt, apparently so are members of the president's own team. one senior official telling us, "i'm going to have to refer to mexican authorities on the actual construction of the caravan." which brings us back to this. >> there's no proof of anything. there's no proof of anything. but they could very well be. >> there could be flying monkeys somewhere in the planet, but there's just no proof of that. we don't see it. with that, let's go to cnn's jim acosta who did much of the questioning you heard there. jim, i mean, the president very clearly and very directly there saying there is no proof of anything, referring to the stuff he has been saying. >> that's right, anderson. and we should point out to our viewers, and this shouldn't be pointed out but it has to be pointed out i suppose, that there is proof for some things. there is proof for lots of things, but the president in this post-truth world that he's trying to impose on the american people and much of the world, he's trying to say, well, i can just about say anything i want and get away with it, and it

sounded as if today what happened in the oval office, anderson, with the president and the vice president, i'm glad you showed that clip because the president kept going to the vice president to try to bail him out, is that they're just telling tales and hoping that the facts will bail them out later. there's just been no evidence provided by the white house up until this point, and keep in mind, this is not the first time the president has been pressed on this claim about unknown middle easterners in the caravan. he's been offered this opportunity multiple times, and they're just not offering any proof. >> and shortly after the president said there's no proof, the department of homeland security did put out a statement saying this is proof. >> that's right. >> is that right? >> that's right. although, i mean, i'm not sure this was proof of anything. in terms of what the department of homeland security put out, but they issued out some tweets, posted some tweets shortly after the president made these comments. we can put this up on screen. it says "citizens of countries outside central america, including countries in the middle east, africa, south asia, and elsewhere, are currently

traveling through mexico toward the u.s." anderson, this doesn't prove that there are middle easterners in there. it's just them saying that that's the case. and this goes back to, i think, another important point. and that is just because the white house or the president or the vice president, they say that there are middle easterners traveling in this caravan, that doesn't necessarily mean there are terrorists traveling in that caravan. so there's just sort of a racially loaded comment that's being made in all of this by saying, well, there are middle easterners coming up in the caravan, suggesting that they're terrorists. i said that to the president and the vice president in the oval office, that they may be offending middle eastern americans all over the country who are peace-loving people, and they just sort of brushed off that question. they want to play the politics of fear in these last two weeks before the midterms, and the facts be damned. >> there certainly doesn't seem to be any indication that the president is going to stop peddling this narrative. you know, kind of shame might

influence some people or a sense of decency, but that doesn't seem to be the case here. >> that's right, anderson. i think that's why this question about why the president keeps labeling himself a nationalist is so important. i pressed him on this in the oval office. asked him, are you trying to say you're a white nationalist? what about these concerns out there you're dog whistling to your base, that you're sending coded messages to your base? he said i haven't heard a theory about that. then he went on to say, well, you know, there are trade issues and so on, as to why he is attaching this label to himself. but anderson, when you're demonizing immigrants, migrants coming up from central america, trying to make their way to the united states and apply for asylum, when you're demonizing middle easterners and making the suggestion they're terrorists and so on in that caravan without offering proof and then calling yourself a nationalist in front of thousands and thousands of people, i don't think it's a stretch for a lot of americans to wonder or not whether the president is secretly considering himself a white nationalist.

>> jim acosta from the white house. thanks, jim. jorge ramos with univision is with the caravan. i spoke to him before air time. >> the president's claim, which he says he has no proof of, he admits he has no proof of, that there are people from the middle east, unknown people from the middle east, in this caravan, when he says that, it sounds like it's code word for terrorists. have you seen anything to back up those claims? have you seen any middle easterners. >> absolutely not, and i think president trump has to tell the truth to the american people. he just wants to create fear. and that is not the truth. i spent the last two days with this caravan of people coming from honduras, guatemala, el salvador. about 5,000 of them. i have spoken honestly with hundreds of them, many of them children. i can tell you, i have not seen a single person from the middle east. if he's suggesting that right here in this group there are terrorists, he's lying. because that is not the truth. what i'm seeing is people fleeing violence, people fleeing extreme poverty, especially from honduras.

but i have not seen a single person from the middle east. there's no proof. why is he saying that? for political purposes? i don't know where he got that. i know that also that he's been saying that vice president pence saying that all this was coordinated and paid by president maduro from venezuela. that is not true. the people here don't even have a dollar to pay for bottled water. those are two lies that the white house is telling, maybe for political purposes, but that's not the reality here. >> about that, has anyone you interviewed said anything about how the caravan was funded? because as you said, the vice president is saying leftist groups in central american countries are funding it and they're being funded by venezuela. >> that's ludicrous. that's completely ludicrous. again, i spent the last 48 hours with all of these immigrants. and by the way, they are not criminals and they're not terrorists. they're not even immigrants.

they're refugees. they don't have a single dollar, anderson. they don't have a single dollar to buy a bottle of water. so if it's been financed, well, i'm not seeing it. because these people have absolutely nothing. they don't have nothing. now, obviously, the question is, how come all of them got together? it's really a large group. i have never seen a group this large. and the answer is very simple. there is safety in numbers. people run high risk crossing mexico and central america. they think that together, they'll be safer, and also, it has to do with money. it's simply a matter of money. they don't have to pay $4,000, $5,000, $6,000 per person to coyotes or smugglers. >> is there a level of organization? how do people hear about the caravan? where do they know where to go to join it? and members of the caravan, they could be exposed to criminal elements, human smugglers, drug traffickers while they're on the journey, correct?

>> yes. and the only ones complaining right now, and i can tell you because we just did a report on univision. the only ones complaining right now are the coyotes because they're not getting $4,000, $5,000, $6,000, $8,000 per immigrant. and i have been talking to many of the refugees here, and they heard it in the news, in guatemala, and in honduras. they heard it on tv. they heard it right here on cell phones. and they think this is the only opportunity they have. in many cases, out of the 7,000 more or less that are here in southern mexico, the mexican government, the mexican media has been reporting that about 2,000 of them are children. and this is their only hope. they lost absolutely everything in their country said of origin, and their risking everything. this is how they learn about it. no financing, no george soros,

no democrats, no nicolas maduro. the explanation is quite simple. violence in their home countries, and extreme poverty. >> jorge ramos, i appreciate it. thank you very much, jorge. >> thank you, anderson. >> let's get perspective now from two other views. joining us is the president's former director of legislative affairs marc short. also senator ted cruz's communications director amanda carpenter. both are now cnn political commentators. amanda, the president is saying there's no proof of anything. that in and of itself is kind of a revealing statement, no? >> well, of course it is. but i think we all know pie now that the president is a very visual person. and so once those photos of the caravan hit the news wires, went on tv, he knew that was something that his voters would be extremely worried about. i think anybody can look at those photos and see there's humanitarian crisis with certain economic, financial, possibly security and health implications. and so then it's away to the races for trump because he fills in the gaps. we have seen him fill in the gaps with lots of questionable statements about who those

people are and their motivations, but to be honest, it's really not clear, and there's no alternative message from the democrats other than kind of saying we don't want to talk about this. we're going to stay focused on health care and everything is fine. everything is not fine. there is a crisis unfolding before our eyes, and someone needs to explain that clearly to people what's going on and what america is going to do about it. >> marc, it would be very easy for the president and legitimate for the president to discuss immigration policy, border security, to talk about what he believes should happen as opposed to what he says the democrats want. why need to kind of go the extra yard and make this allegation which he admits there's no proof of of unknown middle easterners, possibly isis, in this caravan? >> he doesn't need to go the extra yard, but amanda is 100% right. it's a visual that reminds americans about our porous

southern border and the problems we have. it's a question to say who do you trust more to secure the border, donald trump or democrats in congress? >> you're saying if he was lying, why would you trust him more if he's not telling the truth. >> anderson, i'm saying who do you trust more to make sure the southern border's secure? >> i trust somebody who is not lying. and if he's lying about who's coming up, isn't that a problem? >> okay. so let's talk about actually the facts happening at the border. 94,000 central americans last year were detained at the border. did you know 99% of them are still in this country because of laws passed by democrat congress that says via catch and release they must stay in our country until adjudication -- >> i'm not arguing immigration policy with you. i'm simply pointing out a lie. and you've yet to say it's not a lie. >> anderson, what i am saying as well, though, is there are democrats who have also demagogued this issue and are not being honest about what the solution is to get it done. >> okay. so you agree he's lying? >> what i have said is he didn't need to go the extra yard and accuse and make accusations

about middle easterners being in there because as he said he doesn't have proof of that. >> amanda, the president does have a lot of accomplishments. the economy, supreme court justices, whether you agree with, you know, his picks or not. he could be -- there's a lot of things for him to tout for his supporters ahead of the midterms. does he feel, you think, it's not enough? >> listen, one of the reasons he got elected was by campaigning on immigration. there is easily as visually shown in immigration crisis unfolding at the border. sure, they are a few thousand miles away, but this is something that keeps happening. i think the democrats could make a good case, why does this keep happening while you're president, donald trump? why are border crossings up this year while you're president, donald trump? but they're not even making that case. you're asking marc why do voters still go along with him even when he's clearly lying about things? because there's nowhere else to go. and i think that republicans have a good case to make on this. and it sort of -- it's frustrating for me to watch mike

pence fudge the numbers about terrorists apprehended at the border because they have a good case to make and they have work to do. so to me these are just unforced errors while they should be doing the work. >> customs and border protection, they have a good story to tell about apprehending ten suspected or possible terrorists every single day, trying to get into the united states. it doesn't need to be fudged, marc, about it's all on the southern border, it's people walking up through mexico. >> anderson, i'm agreeing with you on that point. i'm agreeing with you 100% on that point. at the same time, there are problems with the laws we have in this country that the president has said, help elect more republicans and we can fix these laws, because right now, i need 60 votes in the united states senate, and i can't win over any democrat votes to actually fix the catch and release laws. >> all right, marc, stay with us. amanda carpenter as well. we're going to come right back. i want to talk about the larger question in all of this and perhaps an ugly one. how effective has the president been on the campaign?

truth or untruth. and are the democrats too optimistic about their chances coming up in this midterm election? later, breaking news. what the president just said about the murder of an american resident, allegedly by the saudi government, jamal khashoggi, ahead. it or a made-up creature.r. it doesn't have wings, horns or teeth. there's no self-appointed crown. it doesn't repurpose someone else's legacy. it's not a metaphor or the result of a merger. it's none of those things. it's our family name. that skills like teamwork, attention to detail, and customer service are critical to business success. like the ones we teach here, every day. and customer service are critical to business success.

if you're waiting patiently for a liver transplant, it could cost you your life. it's time to get out of line with upmc. at upmc, living-donor transplants put you first. so you don't die waiting. upmc does more living-donor liver transplants than any other center in the nation. find out more and get out of line today.

booking a flight doesn't have to be expensive. just go to priceline. it's the best place to book a flight a few days before my trip and still save up to 40%. just tap and go... for the best savings on flights, go to priceline.

smile dad. i take medication for high blood pressure and cholesterol. but they might not be enough to protect my heart. adding bayer aspirin can further reduce the risk of another heart attack. because my second chance matters. be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen. well, as you saw at the top, the president of the united states has not been shy about using fear to help his party win the midterms and in many cases fear and falsehoods. >> they want to open your borders. let people in. illegally. and then they want to pay for those people. for health care, for education. they want to give them cars, they want to give them driver's licenses. i said last night -- we did a great, great rally in arizona last night. and i said, i said last night, what kind of car will they supply them? will it be a rolls royce? >> rolls royces.

now, it's also not true that california is rioting over sanctuary cities, divisive as that issue might be. nor is this true. >> and i'll soon sign into law the largest legislative effort in history to address the opioid crisis. rob and so many others helped. very little democrat support. >> the bill, in fact, passed with nearly unanimous support from republicans and democrats, so that's not true, nor is it true the country is about to enact a new middle class tax cut, which can't happen until congress is back in session, which it's not. so instead today the president scaled back his language only saying he would make a proposal shortly. >> so this will be a 10% -- it's going to be a resolution probably introduced this week, end of the week or early next week. >> so these are just a few of the flurry of falsehoods that appear to be accelerating as midterms approach. the question is will the present republicans pay the price or is it effective?

the president's job approval ratings have ticked up recently, in new polling in a number of key electoral battlegrounds like this one in california show once vulnerable republicans are now hanging on. we're back with marc short and amanda carpenter and joining us is cnn political commentator david chalian. we're two weeks out from the midterms. what is the status for house races at this point? is there evidence that these tactics from the president are working or that the democrats are overconfident about some sort of a blue wave? >> well, i think there's some evidence to suggest not necessarily that these tactics in the last 48 hours are working, although i wouldn't be surprised if it does indeed keep the republican base enthused, but i do think post-kavanaugh, getting kavanaugh on the supreme court, and the continued good economic news, that has helped the numbers uptick for the president, anderson. we do see in that same nbc/"wall street journal" poll you were citing, republicans getting almost to parity with democrats in terms of interest in the election.

i think what we're seeing here now is an environment where the republicans who had been sort of asleep at the switch for much of the last year and a half, are now getting in the game, and that is causing the battlefield to tighten a little bit. >> marc, also, you had the president out at campaign rallies with big crowds. that's got to be very effective just in terms of, you know, it's local media attention, it's national media attention. it's getting republicans excited, and it is a way for him to trumpet the successes that he has had, as well as, you know, put forward some of the stuff we talked about earlier. >> i think that's true, anderson. i think even take the montana rally, i think a lot of the national media focused on his comments about greg gianforte. if you look at both montana newspapers the next day, it was headlines with pictures of trump saying trump helps rosendale take on tester. so the local coverage is different. i agree 100% with what david said. what we have seen is a giant

increase on enthusiasm of republican voters ever since the kavanaugh hearings. the question is can republicans sustain it? i think the president talking about taxes and border security are issues that continue to keep that momentum and enthusiasm up among the base. >> amanda, i don't know why sort of anyone believes the polls that we all focus on at times given what we have seen in the last couple years. particularly, you know, polls that say, oh, there's this huge blue wave coming and all the voter enthusiasm is among democrats, not among republicans. i mean, i feel like i heard that story so many times in 2016. and yes, you know, in the popular vote, hillary clinton won, but it wasn't enough. >> i can tell you what i think is giving the republicans confidence right now. they're realizing that they can confidently go forward, regardless of what trump is doing. everybody was hung on that for a long time, how will it impact my race? maybe they're seeing that it's not. i think the reason for that isn't so much trump. i think it's because the democrats haven't crafted a solid alternative agenda.

think about what newt gingrich did back in the '90s with the contract with america. the democrats still haven't found a way to have an alternative vision. they're essentially saying we're going to be anti-trump, and something something health care. and so once you go back to the republican voters and they see yes, they can get through this, and yes, president trump is going to keep fighting and doing the rallies and press the gas, you're seeing those people turn out in numbers and starting to feel good about their prospects again. >> david -- sorry, go ahead. >> one note on the immigration issue, though. i do think if you look at which republicans are sort of parroting the president out on the campaign trail, they're republicans in deep red states. you look at his numbers on immigration with independents. he's only at 38% approval on that issue with independents. only at 32% approval on that issue with women in our latest poll. and so you're not seeing the republicans who are really where the battle for the house is in the suburbs, in some of the bigger metropolitan areas, i don't think you're seeing those

republican candidates parrot his talk on immigration. that's why we're so sure, all of us i think sitting here, this is really a base strategy to make sure the republican base voters republican newsed. but it's not necessarily what republicans who are trying to hang on to the house need in most of those battlefield districts about voters in the middle. >> at the same time, i would make the suggestion that it does help republicans in north dakota, in indiana, and missouri, and the battleground states where the senate is in play. >> it's so interesting to me the argument by the president that democrats are behind this caravan. just on a logical argument, it would seem to be the worst possible timing for democrats to have a large caravan of thousands of people heading toward the border. >> yeah, but i feel like the democrats allow trump to have a free pass on this issue, because they haven't gone forward and said what their policy or vision for immigration is. essentially, it's just resist, and we're always going to have amnesty before border security.

i mean, that proposition has been rejected by the country since we have been fighting about it since 2006. and so until the democrats fill in those gaps, donald trump is going to keep saying whatever he wants, no matter how wrong or right it is. >> amanda carpenter, david chalian, marc short, thank you very much. appreciate it. breaking news coming up. president trump talking tonight about the murder of journalist jamal khashoggi using the words "total fiasco." you'll see who he's directing those words at and i'll talk it over with retired u.s. army general stanley mcchrystal.

and the cover-up, if you want to call it that, was certainly no good. >> well, the president also said he spoke with the saudi crown prince tonight. he said mohammed bin salman told him me had nothing to do with the murder, that it was at the, quote, lower level. joining me is retired army general stanley mcchrystal, author of a new book called "leaders, myth, and reality" which i want to talk to you in a second. on this story, do you believe an operation like this could be carried out by rogue elements without the crown prince of saudi arabia having knowledge of it or approval of it? >> i think maybe in some states it could in saudi arabia. i don't find that credible. >> that's not how saudi arabia works?

>> no. i mean, the crown prince has an amazing amount of power. and he has been pulling power in for the last couple years. so the reality is i just don't find that convincing. >> just in terms of what u.s. options are, i mean, this is obviously a delicate thing. you know, saudi arabia is an important relationship for the united states. from a leadership standpoint, how do you make this calculus? >> i think there are two things to think about. first, we're going to have relations with saudi arabia next week, next year, and ten years from now. and that matters. and they're going to be hopefully good relations. but this appears to be entirely unacceptable. what's more important now is our moral leadership in the world. not just -- >> you think that's more important than any -- than a relationship not necessarily with saudi arabia, but with mohammed bin salman, with one individual in saudi arabia. >> by a factor of 1,000. we have got to keep our moral credibility in the world. we have to keep it with ourselves. we have to be able to look at our kids and grandkids.

we have got to have a moral compass that's legitimate in the world or we're going to pay a big price elsewhere. >> in your book you are -- it's really fascinating because you're kind of looking at the leadership styles of a whole bunch of different, completely different people. from martin luther king jr. to coco chanel. i'm not sure how much time you've devoted in your life following coco chanel. but it's fascinating what you can learn from these different kinds of styles. >> it's interesting. you'll be surprised. i didn't even know coco chanel was a person until we started the book. i thought it was just a brand name. then when we studied her, she was fascinating. we went back to first principles because i think there's a crisis in leadership in america, and probably more widely in the world. one of the reasons is we don't even know what leadership is anymore. it's been polished. it's been homogenized, it's been media-ized. we're confusing celebrity for leadership. we're sometimes confusing expedience for leadership.

what i believe is go back and look at these flawed characters, every one flawed, even the ones we want to admire so much, albert einstein or martin luther king jr., they're all very human. at the end of the day, what we find is they aren't the iconic reason for everything happening. it's an interaction with us, the followers, and the context of the situation. what that means for us is leaders are very important, but leadership isn't what we think it is and it never has been. we have agency. we have responsibility as followers that sometimes i think we abrogate. >> i want to read something you said in the book. you said that -- about margaret thatcher. you said a leader's power derived from the system that promotes them and they get power only so long as they buy into the system and play by the rules. they can bend the rules but they do so at their own risk. the obvious question then is how do you see the leadership of president trump?

>> well, i think he's bending the rules, but what he really did is point out at that time rules had already changed. we have someone who is a reality tv star, who was masterful at the use of things that were already in existence, how to push information, how to go around traditional media, how essentially to marginalize congress in many ways. and he pointed out to us that the levers of power are different now. so i think the rules are being reunderstood. what i think we have to do is be careful, is decide what we want from leadership. i think it's time for america to have a conversation, not just about specific leaders but with itself. america needs to look in the mirror and decide what our values are. >> one of the things i talked about with general michael hayden, he's talked about the thin veneer of civilization. it's a phrase i have sort of focused on a lot. he points to sarajevo, which i worked in, he worked in during the war in bosnia and how that

was a multicultural -- that was a real city that suddenly ripped apart at the seams and obviously we all saw what happened there. it does seem as though the president, he's not just bending things. he's attacking the very kind of foundations upon which our civilization, our democracy has relied on. does that worry you? because do you believe those are so firmly rooted that they can survive that assault? >> what doesn't worry me is what the single man does. what worries me is what all of we do, what we do or what we don't do. if we follow along in things and say we don't really like the direction but we like certain products of it, or if we accept values different from what we hold important, if someone -- if your banker or real estate agent lied to you would you do business with them next week? >> no. >> and yet if we accept that from leaders, from political leaders or any part of the spectrum or we accept less as

individual followers than is necessary, i think we're the ones giving away our future. >> germany mcclift'll, the book is "leaders: myth and reality." thank you. > as we mentioned, the midterm elections two weeks from today. there's a lot of attention focused on florida, of course. president trump is heading there this weekend. there's someone else there tonight, hillary clinton trying to help raise money at an event for andrew gillum, the democrat running for governor against republican ron desantis. do democrats want hillary clinton back in the game? we'll talk to some ahead. ♪ delicious 100% real chocolate embracing the lightness of crispy rice. crunch. the chocolate bar all americans love. i'm begging you... take gas-x.ed beneath the duvet your tossing and turning isn't restlessness, it's gas! gas-x relieves pressure, bloating and discomfort... fast! so we can all sleep easier tonight. lojust use priceline.ls on travel?

you can save up to 60% on hotels. that's like $120 a night back in your pocket. go to priceline to get deals you won't find anywhere else. ♪ (electronic dance music)♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

as we pointed out earlier in the program, there are exactly two weeks to go until the midterm elections. president trump announced this

morning he's heading to florida next week, campaigning in a state with two high-profile races for both governor and senate. not to be outdone, president obama has been on the trail as well. he's lately been campaigning in las vegas on behalf of nevada democrats. for her part hillary clinton is in florida tonight at a private fund-raiser for andrew gillum in his gubernatorial run against desantis. president trump has continued to go after ms. clinton after beating her in the election. some democrats worry her re-emergence may only embolden the president and his allies. randi kaye sat down with a group of florida democrats to get their take on the return of hillary clinton. >> a show of hands, how many of you think overall hillary clinton is more of a liability than an asset to the gillum campaign? almost all of you. >> hillary clinton is seen as this kind of figure that the right rails against. they go to rallies and they say lock her up. >> hillary clinton is a rallying point for the right. they use that messaging against

hillary clinton to drive out their votes. i think you could end up seeing a huge boost in their numbers because you have hillary clinton now on the other side being associated with gillum so closely. >> what concerns you about the baggage and the scandals that she was associated with and how that might impact the gillum campaign? >> her post-presidential sort of demeanor or platform has been very sort of self-indulgent and very much about relitigating what happened in 2016. in our generation, my generation doesn't really respond to this relitigation of 2016. and i want to call it whining, but at this point, it's kind of what it feels like. >> i am concerned. and as a young person, he nailed it. we're going forward, progressive movement. progressive policies. we're looking ahead, and i think she represents an old democratic party. >> does anyone think hillary clinton can be helpful to the gillum campaign? >> i do. i think she can be financially helpful because she has a history of fabulous

fund-raising, and i think that's where she should stay. >> as far as i know, going out and making speeches for mr. gillum, i don't think so. >> what is it specifically you think, how might hillary clinton harm the gillum campaign, do you think? >> she's just got bad cred. >> bad cred. >> bad cred. people don't trust her. no one trusts her. the reality is, i voted for her. i supported her. but she does things that -- she trips over herself. and she makes big mistakes. >> hillary clinton did an interview recently and said that -- she was asked about the lewinsky affair, and she said it wasn't an abuse of power because monica lewinsky was an adult. >> horrifying. >> is that something that democrats want to hear right now leading up to the midterms? >> no. >> we're in 2018. time's up, me too, harvey

weinstein unleashed a generation-long abuse of power, and it's completely tone deaf to say that a female 21-year-old intern at the white house in the oval office with the president is not a victim. and is bringing her on going to be a trigger for some people saying you know what she just said a week ago. >> her saying, oh, she was an adult and you know, we didn't do nothing wrong can hurt him in a way saying, you know, she's supporting what they have done at that time. >> so the last thing you want is her down here in florida. >> yeah, i mean, it's just not -- let's get some fresh blood down here. spice it up. >> too important. >> stakes are too high. why risk it? he's ahead right now. >> pretty strong voter opinions in the piece. here now to discuss is "usa today" columnist kirsten powers and mrs. clinton's former campaign manager robby mook. you hear the florida democrats basically saying thanks but no thanks to hillary clinton's support down there for gillum.

what do you make of that? >> you know, honestly, it's -- the whole thing's really ironic to me, anderson. hillary clinton is out helping raise money for an incredibly competitive race that i think many democrats regard as a must win. i she can't even go fund raise without people accusing her of all kinds of things. every single democrat should be out there doing everything they can to help these candidates. hillary is there for gillum. she's fund raised or done events with other 12 candidates, so he's certainly not the only one. she's been donating through her pac as well. i think she's doing what every democrat should do. you know, the last thing i would just say is she got more votes when she ran for president than barack obama got in 2012. just think about that. she got the second-highest vote total in the history of this country after obama in 2008. she's popular with a lot of

people, she got a lot of votes. i don't think democrats should be wringing their hands about hillary clinton when she's out there trying to help candidates. i think we should be focused on getting other democrats out to vote. >> kirsten, what do you make of the criticism? >> first of all, i'm going to assume that the campaigns that are inviting her to come probably know more about what's going on on the ground than anybody else does. if they think her coming in to raise money is good for them, they obviously need the money and wouldn't have her come if they thought it was going to be harmful. if she is raising a lot of money, that shows there are a lot of people that feel very differently than the people we just heard from. that said, she is a controversial person. you know, fairly or unfairly. and i think there are a lot of complicated feelings around her and i think you saw a bit of a generational split in what we just watched. clearly the younger generation

people felt very strongly in a way that i felt the older person seemed a little more sympathetic to hillary. the recent comments that she made about bill clinton and monica lewinsky i think were a little tone deaf and a little out of touch. i know there's people that will say it's not fair she's being asked about it, but i think if you're going to be a leader, you're going to get asked these questions, so it's a mixed bag. but in the end i don't think fund-raising is probably going to harm anybody. >> robby, it's interesting, though, how local politicians running races might choose to use her for fund-raising at private events, not necessarily in front of large audiences of people that's going to get television coverage, because clearly she's a lightning rod for many trump supporters and somebody that the president continues to rail against and get crowds to chant against. >> well, every campaign goes through this with every surrogate, right? you have to make determinations about who's going to work best where. you don't see president obama

doing large rallies in north dakota and some of these deeper red states. i agree with everything that's been said so far. these campaigns aren't dumb, they're making a smart choice. like i said, i just -- it's a little stunning to me when hillary clinton is out there trying to help other democrats that we still can't let her just go do that. and al gore got out i remember during the midterms after his election. i know john kerry has been out campaigning and sending e-mails for people. it's just, for some reason with her, we just can't let a good deed go unpunished. but i'm glad she's out there and i'm glad she's helping people. my understanding is she's helped raise $2 million for andrew gillum, so i think it will do a lot of good. >> kirsten, we were just hearing from david chalian before. do you think democrats are overconfident about a blue wave coming certainly for the house? >> i don't think it's -- i don't

think it's overconfident to expect to win the house. i think if you think some sort of tsunami is coming, then maybe you're being overconfident. but i think that even people i've spoken to who are very sober-minded about it feel pretty confident that at a minimum that the democrats would win back the house. but can i just say one other thing on the hillary thing. >> yeah. >> i do think what is troubling to me is that -- watching these democratic voters who don't appreciate why these attacks happened on hillary and why these attacks happened on nancy pelosi. there's one thing that they have in common. they're both women, they're both very strong leaders, and this is just an outright misogynist attack and the president knows exactly what he's doing. the republicans know exactly what they're doing. democrats -- it just would be good if they didn't go along with it but unfortunately a lot of people do go along with it. >> all right, thanks. i want to check in with chris.

>> democrats keep spending their time defending hillary clinton, they're going to get run over by a caravan. that's what we're going deep on tonight, anderson, which is this could be a game-changer issue for the president of the united states. he knows how far away they are. he has the best intelligence telling him what the different parameters of risk really are. he's got a good man running the cbp. so he's got the intelligence that he needs on it, but he sees political advantage. and we're bringing on one of the young democrats who may take trump on in 2020 to see where are the democrats on the caravan? what's their countermessage? how do they preserve themselves for the midterms? and anthony scaramucci is here to take the other side. >> thanks, chris, we'll see you then. coming up next, could there be a second summit meeting between president trump and vladimir putin? we have the very latest on a possible meeting. today... back pain can't win. now introducing aleve back and muscle pain. only aleve targets tough pain for up to 12 hours with just one pill. aleve back & muscle. all day strong. all day long.

at booking.com, we can't guarantee you'll good at that water jet thingy... but we can guarantee the best price on this hotel. or any accommodation, from homes to yurts. booking.com booking.yeah

president trump says he is likely going to meet with russian president vladimir putin perhaps as soon as next month in paris. the president's most recent meeting with putin was over the summer in helsinki and questions still linger over what precisely was discussed between the two

leaders behind closed doors. we really don't know. national security advisor john bolton had been discussing a second summit during meetings in moscow. bolton said the russian leader expressed interest in the meeting that would take place during the 100th anniversary celebrations marking the armistice in the french capital. the news continues right now. i want to hand it over to chris for "cuomo primetime." chris. >> thank you, anderson. i am chris cuomo, welcome to "primetime." the truth has come out about the caravan and the president's wild notions of the monsters headed this way. >> there's no proof of anything. there's no proof of anything. >> but you have to ask, why would trump admit this instead of doubling down, which is his go-to move when he's wrong? the answer could be very worrisome for democrats. maybe trump doesn't need the fear of terrorists to motivate the midterms. maybe the existence of the caravan alone is enough to fuel